The "Supreme" Court of the United States just recently ruled on the (ab)use of
Eminent Domain recently.
What they confirmed is that a majority on the Supreme Court are insane.
If you extend their ruling to its logical extension,
which is not hard,
individuals have no right to property in the United States.
There is no home which exists that the community would not be better served by
seizing the property so that it can be replaced by office space,
condos,
industrial property, etc.
The community would get more money by stealing the house and turning it over to
some private property developer.
Yes, I do mean stealing.
This is exactly what they are doing.

I have no idea of how the "Supreme" Court can read the Constitution and come to
the conclusion that such theft is justified.
The government has the right to take property for the public good using eminent
domain,
but this is limited to public use and should be limited to public use,
but no more (unless local law prohibits it).
This use is for streets and highways and such.

Now a developer can look at your property and decide that they want it and get
the government to take it from you.
Of course, you will not see such things happening with the property of the
rich,
like the Kennedy property,
but the middle-class and poor will suffer this loss.
How many think that all of the houses of the "Supreme" Court Justices would
better serve the community if they were turned into condos or some other
development?
I bet the ruling would be very different if it was their property that was
being taken.

This "ruling" is not about public interest,
it is about profit,
pure and simple and the "Supreme" Court Justices sold out to profit and greed.
It is a disgrace to this country and to their position.

Amendment V

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime,
unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising
in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time
of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense
to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any
criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life,
liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be
taken for public use, without just compensation.

This theft of property violates the 5th Amemdment since the property is not
being taken for "public use",
but instead for private use,
or more correctly "private profit".
The government does not even get the profit that is made by stealing the
property,
but only gets it indirectly by increased taxes.